The Hobby Lobby case is not some odd outlier regarding “religious freedom.” It’s just one of the many ways the anti-choice movement is trying to chip away at women’s access to contraception and instill the idea in the public’s mind that contraception is controversial.

The Roberts Court will issue an opinion in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties cases in June, but that decision will likely not be the last one from the Supreme Court on the challenges to the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit.

Federal courts are increasingly recognizing Title VII protects against employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, which is why a broad ruling in the Hobby Lobby case could be especially devastating.

The controversy and media attention around the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties cases before the Supreme Court undoubtedly, and understandably, focus on contraception. However, there are several important implications for sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention as well.

From the start of this week’s oral arguments, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg drilled former Solicitor General Paul Clement, who was arguing on behalf of the for-profit craft store Hobby Lobby. That’s because they know that if Hobby Lobby wins, women lose.

Ultimately, it may not be the conservative justices’ animosity toward reproductive rights and women’s health care generally that sinks the birth control benefit, but rather the Obama administration’s refusal to vigorously defend it.